The ad was honestly bad enough at the beginning, then at the end the awkwardness just shut up to the power of the nth. The guy on the left, speaking like some over knowledgeable hacker or something, reminiscent of Live Free or Die hard. The horror-ish soundtrack, the straightforwardness of the interviewer, like he's talking to mental patients (which they seem to be). I'm not even going to go into the second part, with the "user generated content" getting out of hand.

A bit blatant with the paganism in the last sentence, no?

Please don't take the Lord's name in vain.

Gotta love engadget's comment system associating my reply to the wrong person.

@guusvoorham
I don't believe that I was on the path of calling freedom of speech something to be controlled. I may have phrased it the wrong way. Took it out of context? The particular attenuation of importance and impact of the WWII set forth by the morons I was initially replying to simply ticked me off. Let me clarify: the way this advertisement is presented has a peculiar mocking effect on the entire matter at hand.

Let me address the point you have made."This advertisement is not funny, but painfully ironic." Perhaps what's the most painfully ironic, is the fact that you cannot see the damage done by putting out such an advertisement in the first place. It has a diminishing effect on the consequences, if a similar image/advertisement is used again by the same company, or really, even another company. It is really 'too bad' that Sony has partnered up with a company that sees such content as usable for a world wide distribution. Let me also elaborate to your remark on the advertisement "not trying to be funny." An interpretation such as that is something I have trouble getting a full comprehensive grasp of. You're pushing the idea forward that your particular view of what the advert means to you (i.e. it being not particularly funny to you), should be the basis of the error in my interpretation of it. Surely you know how individuals' minds react to the image, and therefore you would know that using such images has no particular lessening effect of the comprehension of the horror of WWII on the psyche of people who aren't fully informed about it.
On the point you make about an image being simply a collection of pixels. Let me just state such an oversimplification is most likely the most incredulous remark I have heard about ANYTHING relating to the interpretation of a visual representation. Most importantly you miss the point I make about the image. It isn't about the image in any sense. It is about the message. It is the MESSAGE that you so fully have seen justified to rebuke from mentioning. The message that displaying this sort of approach to the horrors of of WWII is acceptable. That it isn't to be scrutinized. It is the aggregate of the psychopathic imagery, and their nonchalant approach towards their distribution of it in this picture, that makes up the congregate reason for my scrutiny towards the message of this advertisement.
What I'm getting at, is that while the company may have full right to post such images, it surprises that they would. I hope they dearly suffer for it. Their latest advertisements are of such a nonsensical nature that I couldn't hope for anything else but a world wide spread criticism from gamers around the world, and Sony's sincerest apology for employing the psychopaths that create such revoking garbage. The thought that the effort to decipher the meaning of these images would yield any sort of practical, or applicable result, is truly an astounding retrospect.

@guusvoorham
I don't believe that I was on the path of calling freedom of speech something to be controlled. I may have phrased it the wrong way. Took it out of context? The particular attenuation of importance and impact of the WWII set forth by the morons I was initially replying to simply ticked me off. Let me clarify: the way this advertisement is presented has a peculiar mocking effect on the entire matter at hand.

Let me address the point you have made."This advertisement is not funny, but painfully ironic." Perhaps what's the most painfully ironic, is the fact that you cannot see the damage done by putting out such an advertisement in the first place. It has a diminishing effect on the consequences, if a similar image/advertisement is used again by the same company, or really, even another company. It is really 'too bad' that Sony has partnered up with a company that sees such content as usable for a world wide distribution. Let me also elaborate to your remark on the advertisement "not trying to be funny." An interpretation such as that is something I have trouble getting a full comprehensive grasp of. You're pushing the idea forward that your particular view of what the advert means to you (i.e. it being not particularly funny to you), should be the basis of the error in my interpretation of it. Surely you know how individuals' minds react to the image, and therefore you would know that using such images has no particular lessening effect of the comprehension of the horror of WWII on the psyche of people who aren't fully informed about it.
On the point you make about an image being simply a collection of pixels. Let me just state such an oversimplification is most likely the most incredulous remark I have heard about ANYTHING relating to the interpretation of a visual representation. Most importantly you miss the point I make about the image. It isn't about the image in any sense. It is about the message. It is the MESSAGE that you so fully have seen justified to rebuke from mentioning. The message that displaying this sort of approach to the horrors of of WWII is acceptable. That it isn't to be scrutinized. It is the aggregate of the psychopathic imagery, and their nonchalant approach towards their distribution of it in this picture, that makes up the congregate reason for my scrutiny towards the message of this advertisement.
What I'm getting at, is that while the company may have full right to post such images, it surprises that they would. I hope they dearly suffer for it. Their latest advertisements are of such a nonsensical nature that I couldn't hope for anything else but a world wide spread criticism from gamers around the world, and Sony's sincerest apology for employing the psychopaths that create such revoking garbage. The thought that the effort to decipher the meaning of these images would yield any sort of practical, or applicable result, is truly an astounding retrospect.

@ Mark Anderson and G
I take incredible offense to what you have said. Effects being are still being felt (is THAT an understatement!) from the result of that psychopathic war. The very idea that one should disregard the horror of a tragedy because it has passed, is something that surpasses my comprehensive capability. Additionally, BECAUSE the results of the Second World War are still so blatantly before us, it is questionable as to how your argument has any validity (or sanity for that matter). Sony has been well known as of late for their moronic adverts. Free speech can only go so far before someone takes serious offense. I can guarantee you that many people have taken offense to this advertisement. What exactly it is supposed to be advertising remains a towering mystery to me. Psychopathy, as far I can understand.

Next time you speak, whether verbally or through text, consider the effects of the message you send forth. This sort of tragedy is not to be relegated to a laughable matter. Strange...A person who has no inkling of what a proper historical education might be, has completely ruined my day. Is it not the purpose of the scholastic system to teach people how they should relate to one another? I'm at a loss for words. I feel a great remorse towards people like you, and especially cretins who side with you. Please get a proper education before sharing your remarks about events that involve the taking of human lives.

The newer DSLRs can take anywhere of 5 frames and up per second. Imagine a Nikon D3x taking that many frames, in RAW. You're talking 40 (or more) megabytes PER FRAME. Card speed has a long way to go still. Right now all DSLRs rely on buffer for longer bursts.

The D700 has a full frame sensor, and yet it doesn't have a single digit name either. Names don't matter much in product advertising anymore, or at least, they don't stick to the old "code" which allowed you to instantly know the worth of the product.

While we're on video, imagine the same framerates and resolutions with the light capabilities of the D700 (the D700s that's hopefully to appear soon).

no u